1913 Metz 22 - Our first project

[JV Puleo]

Somewhere I read an article on re-babbitting Metz cam bearings. It's something you don't want to do if it can possible be helped but those bearing clearances are fine as is so I think it safe to presume they are ok on the cam as well. What it does mean is that you have to be very careful cleaning up the block. I don't think it can be hot tanked as I've no idea how that effects Babbitt and wouldn't want to find out. I'm guessing the trick you used to clean the head stock of your lathe, with the heated solvent, would be far safer. You could also pump Evaporust through the water jackets while the engine is apart.

Edited June 24, 2023 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[Luv2Wrench]

Funny you should mention that...  It appears that the part I need to replace (the beveled gear and shaft) rides in a casting that also functions as the outside of the rear camshaft bearing.   I don't think the gear/shaft will come out while the assembly is in the crankcase.  I'm also not sure how to get the assembly out of the crankcase.  The crankcase is aluminum and the assembly is cast iron.  Hopefully these would not be brazed together?  My thought is that the crankcase is heated and then the assembly is pressed in.  I guess I'll need to heat it up and press it out.  At this time, however, it appears that I will need to pour the rear bearing.  I'll know more once (if) I get the assembly out.  When I melted out the babbitt in the original engine I assume the procedure was to smoke the end of the camshaft, insert it and then pour the babbitt.  I don't think that's the case because when I look up in the casting I can see a hole for an oil passage.  There were be no way to add that once it was poured (well, no easy way).  I assume these were poured outside of the engine, oil passage way created and then the assembly pressed in.  Such fun!

 

Here's a picture.  I need to remove the gear on the end and replace.  The gear is secured to the shaft with a pin, maybe tapered or maybe not.  Not sure if there's enough room in there to remove the pin.  The picture is the "good" one.  The most desirable process would be remove the entire assembly from both crankcases, switch the gear and then re-install.   Among the concerns are that attempting to drive the pin out with it in place with will break the casting.  Not sure if I can get support behind it. 

 

 

Edited June 24, 2023 by Luv2Wrench (see edit history)

[JV Puleo]

What you describe is, if I understand correctly, a very conventional rear cam bearing. My 1910 REO had a similar setup as does the Mitchell. The casting was bolted to the crankcase. It was not pressed in nor was it brazed...there simply wasn't any good way to permanently attach cast iron to aluminum at the time. If that casting is secured by bolts or machine screws remove them and try wiggling it a bit. I suspect it will come out whole if you tip it sideways. In any case, think "simple answer first".

 

It looks as if you have a conventional cam shaft. At the time, they were also made with separate lobes pinned to the shaft. With that type, the center bearing is the shaft diameter and you have to remove half or all of the lobes in order to get it out. You should have holes in the crank case large enough to slide it out intact.

 

I would replace the Babbitt with a bronze bushing. To do that you will have to center the casting in order to bore it to the OD of the bushing. When they poured Babbitt it was common, especially with inexpensive cars, to just pour it in a rough casting so the hole will not be perfectly centered and it won't be right for a bushing. This sounds more complicated than it really is...the hard part is getting the casting centered in the lathe. Look for a machined surface...chances are the OD of the casting on the outside is concentric with the camshaft. If you have to bore completely through the casting to get the surface for the bushing you can make a blind bushing to fit.

 

It is almost certainly a tapered pin holding that piece and you may have to drill it out. If so, and there is room, I'd replace the pin with a sort piece of ground rod drilled on each end for a cotter pin. I wouldn't do any hammering where stress will be placed on the aluminum. The alloys available at the time are not very good by today's standards. They are often porous, which is why aluminum crankcases were often painted inside and out with aluminum paint.

 

More pictures would help...you may also have a separate piece that olds the front cam bearing in which case it is only the center bearing you have to contend with and it might be quite easy to get the cam out.

 

Fixing what were cheap cars is often more challenging than  fixing high end cars because we have to contend with all the shortcuts they took to save money and, which often called for elaborate jigs and fixtures. All that said, you are one of the very few I know of who is fully equipped to deal with this. It will take some thought and planning but you should be able to do do a much better job than the factory did.

 

The cam driven oil pump I made fits on the back of the crankcase behind the flywheel in place of the original casting. It supports the cam as well as driving the pump.

Edited June 24, 2023 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[JV Puleo]

Looking at the photo, I'm guessing that the pin we are discussing goes through the casting and keeps the shaft from moving up or down. If it will not come out as is, it would be better to destroy the little shaft and make a new one than it would be to hammer on the casting. This is one reason I hate tapered pins. I have successfully removed them but it is always a challenge and often enough they have to be drilled out. The taper is so small that you usually can't tell which is the big side either. If you drill it you may be able to knock out the pieces but you are almost certainly going to drill partly into the casting. If that happens, you can drill and ream the hole larger, make a custom pin and a new shaft modified to accept the larger pin. I'm guessing the shaft has a groove in it that the pin rotates against.

[Luv2Wrench]

A couple edits/additions to the above posts.

 

I succeeded in removing the camshaft without breaking anything.  That's the good news.  Unfortunately that's about all the good news.

 

The bearing is not poured in rather the assembly itself is the bearing.  The end of the assemble that extends outside the crankcase is filled with lead as a final assembly step.

 

The solid timing gear I have does not fit the crankshaft.  Apparently the crankshaft was changed to be tapered on the end.  To use the original timing gear I would need to swap the camshaft as well.  The original camshaft doesn't look bad but the "new" one certainly looks better.

 

I've tried repeatedly to get the pin out and have so far not been able to do so.  There isn't room to drill it out, at least with the tools I have. 

 

Options now are:

 

1) Get a 90 degree adapter for my Dremel and attempt to drill out the pin.  If successful, proceed as planned.  Still have the timing gear issue.

 

2) Repair the gear in situ.   I might be able to build up the area with something (silver solder, bronze ??) and then file it in place.  Downsides to this is the heat in the area might wreak havoc.  Obviously filing the new teeth isn't going to be easy either.  If this works I still have the timing gear issue.  I could try cutting a new one or try swapping the crankshaft. 

 

3) Use the original crankcase, bearings, crankshaft, camshaft and the "new" cylinder block, connecting rods, pistons, etc.  Obviously that means the crankshafts must have the same dimensions and the bearing clearances be acceptable.  While this would be a backup, I'm going to put the old bearing back in and do some measurements. 

 

4) Use the original engine.  Bore it out, new aluminum pistons, connecting rods, grind crankshaft, pour new bearings, etc, etc.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 24, 2023 by Luv2Wrench (see edit history)

[Luv2Wrench]

5 minutes ago, JV Puleo said:

Looking at the photo, I'm guessing that the pin we are discussing goes through the casting and keeps the shaft from moving up or down. If it will not come out as is, it would be better to destroy the little shaft and make a new one than it would be to hammer on the casting. This is one reason I hate tapered pins. I have successfully removed them but it is always a challenge and often enough they have to be drilled out. The taper is so small that you usually can't tell which is the big side either. If you drill it you may be able to knock out the pieces but you are almost certainly going to drill partly into the casting. If that happens, you can drill and ream the hole larger, make a custom pin and a new shaft modified to accept the larger pin. I'm guessing the shaft has a groove in it that the pin rotates against.

I hadn't thought of sacrificing the shaft.  I'm not sure there's room to do that but I do like that plan.

 

The additional problem with the pin is that I have to do it twice as I'm swapping the gear. 

 

If I could get the whole assembly out as a unit I could definitely repair or make a new gear.  I don't think I can get the assembly out without breaking it and/or the crankcase. 

 

 

Edited June 24, 2023 by Luv2Wrench (see edit history)

[JV Puleo]

Of course you can...it just takes patience and thought.

It took me three years to think of a way to take the front sheave off my crank ... this won't be the problem your anticipating. The real problems will sneak up on you when you aren't prepared.

 

Think in terms of "what did it do" and "how can I do the same thing" rather than emulating the original method. Usually, but not always, the original method was good but it's often not the only solution and, often as not, it was the cheap solution.

Edited June 24, 2023 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[JV Puleo]

Use the best parts. There is no repairing that gear in place. If it went together it can come apart.

Make a new timing gear...something like 7075 aluminum. You have the equipment already and it's not all that difficult. The hardest part is not falling asleep while doing it because cutting gear teeth is boring.

 

I forget now but is the Hendey mill an universal? I'm guessing it's a helical cut gear. It will have a 14-1/2 degree pressure angle and I can almost guarantee the angle of the helix will not be something weird.

Edited June 24, 2023 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[JV Puleo]

What does that look like on the outside of the crankcase?

 

If the mill isn't a universal you can make a fixture, like the one I made for tapers on the axle crosses, to hold the dividing head. Setting the angle is easy.

 

[edit] I see it is a universal so that's about 10 hours of work saved.

 

That would not be an easy gear to make but I'll bet its readily available from Martin or Boston Gear.

Edited June 24, 2023 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[ArticiferTom]

My friend just rebuild his cam areas last year can check with if want . I do remember that some of the hold set screws came down from head side . He also had new fibre gears for sides of his . The machinist has the programing done and ready for next need to be made.

Edited June 24, 2023 by ArticiferTom (see edit history)

[ArticiferTom]

Talked to , he did not remove that pinion shaft with gear . However the book parts said it has pin . So that must be how it mounts . Also rear bearing is pinned also , as opposed to front and center with screws. Also rear is not poured but listed as a plug , maybe lead, taped in like modern soft plug .

Edited June 24, 2023 by ArticiferTom (see edit history)

[Luv2Wrench]

Thanks for all the replies!

 

While looking through the parts list I noticed that the bearings had a part number.  I went and checked the bearings and sure enough. they all have part numbers on them. To be clear, the part number is on the bearing material, not the cap.  As such this confirms my suspicion that these were insert bearings and not poured.   With that bit of info I decided to check the fit of my original crankshaft.  I remember when taking it apart it had a bunch of homemade shims between the to halves.  When I took the crankshaft out of the "new" engine I noticed the shims it had were obviously factory made.  There were also less shims.  My guess is that the bearings were undersized from the factory and you used shims (also a part number, sold by the dozen it says) to space them out to get the correct clearance.  Armed with that information (and some correct shims) I tried fitting the center bearing of the original engine.  In my head I could also hear Joe saying "use Timesaver to get the fit just right" and so I did.  After an hour I had it right at 0.0015   I can do the same for the front and rear.  I checked the fit of the connecting rods (and thus pistons) from the "new" engine with the crankshaft and found they fit fine and I can get a perfect fit by changing shims and Timesaver.  It will probably take a full day or two but I should be able to get the clearances just about perfect. 

 

As of right now (and the plans are still fluid) the resulting engine will be my original engine with the "new" engine supplying the cylinder block, valves, pistons and connecting rods/bearings. I'll get new lifters and springs.  This solves the oil pump gear problem as well as the deteriorating timing gear.  A nice side effect of this is that it preserves the original engine (in a way).  In addition, the car is titled using the engine number that is stamped on the crankcase.   I'm sure my engine guy will blow this plan up on Monday when he says block needs to be bored. 

 

Edited June 25, 2023 by Luv2Wrench (see edit history)

[Luv2Wrench]

1 hour ago, ArticiferTom said:

Talked to , he did not remove that pinion shaft with gear . However the book parts said it has pin . So that must be hoe mounts . Also rear bearing is pined also as opposed to front and center with screws. Also rear is not poured but listed as a plug , maybe lead, taped in like modern soft plug .

I noticed that in the parts book as well.  I think the rear cam bearing is part of the assembly that hold the shaft/gear.  I bet it is pinned and I'll take a closer look.

[Luv2Wrench]

Main bearing fitting is complete!  Rear and center are 0.0015" and the front is 0.002".   Once I get everything together and start assembling the engine I will probably play around with the shims on the front bearing and see if I can get it to 0.0015" as well.   I targeted 0.0015" as that seemed to be the clearance others in the Model T world are striving for.  It took a long time to get to that because my initial readings were at or under 1 thou.  Unfortunately I didn't have a 5 tenths shim so I used the Timesaver.  It may save you time but it still takes quite some time!!

 

The block has been soaking all day and is looking pretty good.  I'll let it soak for another day or so and then get it cleaned up.  

 

I measured the original camshaft and to my surprise it is in better condition than the "new" one.  When I first bought the project 12 years ago I didn't know much about rebuilding engines.  I remember measuring the lobes on the camshaft and noticing they were not the same and thinking it was worn out.  I now know it is common for intake and exhaust to have different lifts.  Measuring again knowing which lobes were intake and which were exhaust I found that the camshaft was pretty much spot on.  So something I thought was garbage is actually in great condition!  I do laugh at my old self and I'm sure there are those reading my posts that know 100x what I do and are laughing at the current me!! 

 

I have three different cylinder heads and each have their own problems.  The original head has a chip in the casting at the water outlet.  Possibly usable.  The second one is in good condition but missing the water outlet casting.  The third one has the water outlet casting but has a massive amount of weld down the middle were someone fixed a crack.  I'm hesitant to use it.  The simple solution is to take the outlet casting off and put it on the other one.  Of course the bolts won't come out.  I'll probably have to cut the heads off, drill out the bolts and then thread.  At least I have the casting!

 

All in all I think a good weekend!

 

 

[Luv2Wrench]

Fresh off the momentum of getting the main bearing clearances set, I was looking forward to getting the block out of the "hot tank" (storage bin full of degreaser sitting outside in the sun) and getting it cleaned up, valves lapped and ready to go.  Unfortunately as I removed the first valve, half of the valve guide fell out as well.  As I stared in disbelief at what was left of the valve guide I also notice the block was cracked!!!  I took the rest of the valves out trying to pretend I didn't see the crack.  Two more guides also fell out as they too were cracked off where they go into the block.  As I looked around the block some more I found two more cracks.  It seems this engine which I was so thrilled to get because it seemed in such good condition is actually worse off than what I had to start with. 

Given the condition I'll most likely be going back to the original block.  The issue with it seems pretty minor in comparison.  It has a defect of sorts in one of the cylinders.  I think it might have been a void in the original casting and they just used it anyway.  I'm not sure how much trouble it might cause but at this point I think the best course of action is to finish building the engine and do a compression test.  If that's acceptable then run it.  If that still acceptable then she's good, if not then probably look for another block.  Such fun.

 

 

Edited June 27, 2023 by Luv2Wrench (see edit history)

[JV Puleo]

That's pretty bad...but at least you have a backup. I'd look into putting a sleeve in the questionable bore. Chances are they will all have to be bored in any case. Running on dirt roads without an air cleaner was very hard on them. All of the brass cars I'm familiar with had badly worn bores.

Does this engine have removable valve guides or were they cast into the block? My own car had them cast in...a cheap expedient at the time and one that invariable takes some work to correct. In my case, the valves had 1/2" stems so I simply pressed in new valve guides and will use valves with a 5/16" stem. If the numbers don't work out you may have to bore the original guides. Needless to say, all this is much easier when the block is out and stripped so now is the time to discover these things.

[Luv2Wrench]

It appears the guides are pressed in though they are also cast iron.   I tried pressing one out and even with the usual methods it didn't seem to be going anywhere.  I get that, it has been in there for over a hundred years.  I could definitely drill it out and then make replacements.  The guides also hold the springs so just anything wouldn't work, I'd need to make them.  Fortunately it appears the other block is fine and has minimal wear.

 

Boring oversize is a bit of an issue.  While I can get Model T pistons, they don't fit on the connecting rods.  If I get Model T connecting rods then I will have fitment issues to work through there as well.  Pistons, rings and connecting rods are also pretty expensive.  I'm not cheap but I'll definitely have a compression check and/or blue smoke force me to down that path.  I will be replacing tappets and springs.   Can't afford to have a camshaft failure.

 

Edited June 27, 2023 by Luv2Wrench (see edit history)

[JV Puleo]

You might make a custom puller...a piece of tubing and a find thread bolt. If that doesn't work I'd say bore them out. The one thing you have to avoid is putting any stress on the block since cast iron is so brittle.

 

What is the problem with fitting the Model T pistons to the rods? I presume the wrist pins aren't the same size but that should be solvable with bushings. I imagine Model T pistons are about the cheapest available so I'd use them if possible. Also. these early cars usually had the wrist pins locked in the connecting rod. That isn't necessary or even desirable although it was the state of the engineering before WWI. You could bush or bore your rods to the Model T size and use full floating wrist pins.

 

Edited June 27, 2023 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[Luv2Wrench]

If I went with Model T pistons then I'd get forged connecting rods with modern insert bearings and have the crankshaft machined to fit them.  One cylinder would be sleeved and the rest bored out.  I can't do the crankshaft myself and I'm not really comfortable with performing my first sleeve and bore job on a rare 110 year old block.  I'm more comfortable with fabricating things as I can do that over and over until I get it right.

 

Given what I paid for the MG, I'd estimate $1200 for the machine work. Connecting rods are $495, pistons are $95, rings are $103 so that's about $2000 additional in the engine and I don't know that it needs it.   My plan, at least right now, is to finish assembling the engine, check compression and see how it runs.  If it needs all that work then I can get that started and move on to others things.  The line for the machine shop is at least 6 months.

 

[Luv2Wrench]

Backup block cleaned up and the valves lapped.  Very happy with how they fit.  No pitting in the seats.  Engine either had a valve job before it was taken out of service or no one ever drove it. Original markings on the deck which is pretty cool. 

 

 

Edited June 28, 2023 by Luv2Wrench (see edit history)

[JV Puleo]

Are those two-piece valves, made with a cast iron head and steel stem threaded into it? That was done because cast iron had far better heat resistance than any steel then available. However, they are a something of a risk. The head can break off and, in at least one case I know of, literally be driven through the piston or cylinder wall. In my own case, my first brass car, a 1910 REO, had two broken valves so this isn't a rare problem. The safest thing to do is to replace them with modern valves made in one piece. That flaw in the cylinder wall may be the result of a valve failure.

 

I have the same feeling about working on original parts. It's far more relaxing to make something when you know that if it doesn't come out right you can do it again.

Edited June 28, 2023 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[Luv2Wrench]

9 minutes ago, JV Puleo said:

Are those two-piece valves, made with a cast iron head and steel stem threaded into it? That was done because cast iron had far better heat resistance than any steel then available. However, they are a something of a risk. The head can break off and, in at least one case I know of, literally be driven through the piston or cylinder wall. In my own case, my first brass car, a 1910 REO, had two broken valves so this isn't a rare problem. The safest thing to do is to replace them with modern valves made in one piece. That flaw in the cylinder wall may be the result of a valve failure.

 

I have the same feeling about working on original parts. It's far more relaxing to make something when you know that if it doesn't come out right you can do it again.

I've heard that the two dots mean they are two part valves but I don't know for sure. I might spark test with one I'm not using because replacing these might be difficult as Model T valves do not fit.

Is there another way to distinguish two piece valves?  As quick Google say that the two dots are a common sign but people have found one piece valve with same dots (something about holding it for grinding)

 

Update: Sparks from each end were the same, short red and not many of them. 

[JV Puleo]

The two extra holes are for an antique valve grinding tool. (I have one) I doubt it has anything to to do with how they were made but the oldest valves usually have them which is why I asked. If you carefully wire brush the heads you ought to be able to see the interface where the stem was screwed in. The Mitchell valves could be either. I think mine are one piece but I know of a case where a piece came off one and was driven through the water jacket of a Mitchell from the inside. I found several half-heads in my REO when I took it apart so I'd be very careful. As to new valves, I have the name of a company that can furnish them by size so replacing them should not be a problem. Depending on the size, I may even have some.

 

You need head diameter, stem diameter and length. Sometimes you have to get them a bit long and shorten them or, if the head diameter is a bit off they can be ground or even turned using carbide tools. These were stainless steel valves. The stainless used for valves is very tough to machine but it can be done. I prefer grinding them.

 

A spark test should tell you.

Edited June 28, 2023 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[Luv2Wrench]

Head diameter: 1.454

Stem diameter: 0.3085

Stem length: 4.80

I measured stem length as the length from the bottom of the head to the end of the stem, ie; length of stem not including the thickness of the valve head.

 

[Luv2Wrench]

So stupid question... if I get a Model T valve with a .312 stem do I get a .312 reamer?   It seems like an obvious answer but I also see where in the valve description they say 1 thou clearance.  Seems like you'd need a .313 reamer.

It appears I could get a Model T valve, ream out my valve guides and have the valves ground down to fit or have the head ground to fit the valves.  Or I could get an electric motor and a battery...

[Luv2Wrench]

Now that I've seen some pictures of two-piece valves, I'm pretty confident that what I have are one-piece.  The head flows smoothly with a small radius into the stem.

[JV Puleo]

Yes. The two piece valves I'm familiar with are very obvious.

I'd go with a .312 reamer. If the stems are a little tight use a 5/16 barrel lap to open them up.

Edited June 28, 2023 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[Luv2Wrench]

Headed to the machine shop today to talk about getting the one cylinder sleeved, the others bored and crankshaft ground.  I'm still hesitant to just go all in without knowing it is needed but at least I'll know what the costs are and when it could get done.  I'll ask about the valves while I'm there.

 

Update:  Interesting visit.  The issue with cylinder 1 is porosity and he thinks it might have left the factory that way as it is only 6 thou over original size.  Rather than sleeving one and boring the others we're looking at sleeving all to 3.75" as if there's porosity in one place there might be others just waiting to ruin the day.

 

Crankshaft is going to be polished for the mains and taken down to 1.238" for the rods.  That will allow me to buy the forged rods with modern insert bearings.  I'll need to go ahead and get these to verify they'll fit width wise.

 

Per the valves, he can turn them down to fit and he'll ream the guides to fit.

 

Might have an opening in a month so I've got a bit of time to decide though I am leaning towards that.  It's going to be a lot of money but will basically be a new engine.  Once again I'm putting more money in a car that I'll probably not get back, but she's 110 years old so maybe she's worth it.

 

Edited June 28, 2023 by Luv2Wrench (see edit history)

[Mike "Hubbie" Stearns]

Just go for it. Do it once and you won’t have to worry about it again. It’s only money right?  Mike

[JV Puleo]

Porosity was a significant problem with inexpensive cars at the time although more so with aluminum than cast iron. Iron casting technology was very good but, in my own case, the gentleman who bored the jugs told me that there was a significant difference between the two, one being quite a bit denser than the other.

 

I have some reservations about modern insert bearings so I'd be curious to hear comments by someone who has put a lot of miles on a car so equipped. The "bent hairpin" cranks of the time flexed quite a bit and the Babbitt layer on inserts is very thin. I would never use them on main bearings but I'm wondering about connecting rods. If the inevitable crankshaft flex does not effect the rods then it should work but the thicker Babbitt of poured bearings is probably still preferable as it absorbs the flex without wearing through the surface.

[Luv2Wrench]

New problem.  Model T rod bearing width is 1.50" which is about 25 thou wider than the Metz.  I'll get a professional opinion but I don't see them grinding out of the crank giving how little area there is around the journal.  Next plan is to find out how to adapt the modern aluminum Model T pistons to the Metz connecting rod.  This has been done before but the person that did it had the machine shop do it so the details are a bit scarce.  My machine shop guy said just run it as is and fix it if I don't like it.

 

[chistech]

The porosity issue sounds like a job for JB weld! Okay, sorry guys, just trying to lighten up a crappy situation especially with how much we bust on JB weld! Hope you get everything cleared up but I’m sure you will. I am really enjoying the report between you and Joe P on this. Two men with like minds and like abilities. I’m just sitting back, reading, and learning things.

[JV Puleo]

3 hours ago, Luv2Wrench said:

New problem.  Model T rod bearing width is 1.50" which is about 25 thou wider than the Metz.  I'll get a professional opinion but I don't see them grinding out of the crank giving how little area there is around the journal.  Next plan is to find out how to adapt the modern aluminum Model T pistons to the Metz connecting rod.  This has been done before but the person that did it had the machine shop do it so the details are a bit scarce.  My machine shop guy said just run it as is and fix it if I don't like it.

 

.025 could be fixed just by surface grinding. That's not very much but I like the idea of using the Metz rods. You'll have to take some measurements of the wrist pins but you should be able to make any wrist pin. Model T pins are fairly large...the number I  remember is .750 but I've never had any interest in Fords so you can't take anything I say about them seriously. What size are the Metz pins? The length is immaterial...only the diameter counts.

[JV Puleo]

4 hours ago, Luv2Wrench said:

... My machine shop guy said just run it as is and fix it if I don't like it.

I don't like sounding too critical but that reminds me of my one and only experience with giving a brass car engine to a machine shop. The man in charge had a sterling reputation but he did a number of things that I now shudder to think of. His reasoning was "it's only going to be used for parades" or some such idea. He had no conception of anyone actually driving a brass car any distance.

 

I've said this  before but it bears repeating..,this  was the experience that convinced me that I had to learn to do it myself if I wanted the sort of job I felt comfortable with.

[Luv2Wrench]

I get what you're saying and he is in the camp of it will be used for parades.  The reality for the area I live is that is all it could be used for.  In the restoration I do have to keep in mind the next owner.

With that said, the wear on the cylinders was 6 thou, which would fall in the hone it and ring it category but that's where the problem is.  I can't get rings. 

 

I've done some more research and here is the problem with Model T pistons on Metz connection rods.  The Metz connecting rod floats on the wrist pin.  The wrist pin floats in the piston.  It doesn't hit the cylinder walls because (and you'll love this) they added a fourth and very tall piston ring that conveniently covers the wrist pin ends. 

 

Your typical Model T piston doesn't have a way to secure the wrist pin because the connecting rod is secured to it and holds it in place.  With a Model T piston and a Metz connecting rod the wrist pin is free to move around and leave a lasting impression on the cylinder walls.  From what I've read there is, however, a rather simple solution.  Teflon plugs on each side of the wrist pin.  A slightly more complex solution is to machine a groove for a snap ring into the pistons.  This is what another Metz owner did.  Right now (and we know how fast these plans change...) I'm thinking of getting the Model T pistons and using the Metz connecting rods.  I just need to find the teflon "buttons" which I don't think will be too hard.

 

Joe: The issue with the crankshaft is what you said earlier, the flexibility.  It is damn near a 90 degree angle from the journal and the connecting rod is nearly brushing it as is.

 

[chistech]

Would a set of custom Ross pistons be something you’d consider? If you did that you wouldn’t have to worry about the Teflon plugs and they’d make the pistons for a set of available rings. I don’t feel the ones I got were that expensive especially when Egge quoted me virtually double (just for the pistons alone)for their cast aluminum versus the Ross forged aluminum. 6 pistons, hasting rings, wrist pins, pin clips, and shipping from CA to Ma was $830. If you end up sleeving and need pistons because of that i would highly recommend them. 

Edited June 29, 2023 by chistech (see edit history)

[Luv2Wrench]

18 minutes ago, chistech said:

Would a set of custom Ross pistons be something you’d consider? If you did that you wouldn’t have to worry about the Teflon plugs and they’d make the pistons for a set of available rings. I don’t feel the ones I got were that expensive especially when Egge quoted me virtually double (just for the pistons alone)for their cast aluminum versus the Ross forged aluminum. 6 pistons, hasting rings, wrist pins, pin clips, and shipping from CA to Ma was $830. If you end up sleeving and need pistons because of that i would highly recommend them. 

That's a good option, do you have contact info?

 

[Terry Harper]

7 hours ago, Luv2Wrench said:

I can't get rings. 

Try Otto Gas Engine Works in Maryland. They have supplied custom rings to the antique engine and tractor community for many, many years. They also fabricate custom pistons.

 

Quote

 

PISTON RING GRINDING

I can modify existing rings by grinding the side of the ring to a previously unavailable size such as a metric width or a special in-between size. Cost is $5.00 per ring extra for this service. I can do 3/4" x 1/16", 7/8" x 1/16", 1" x 1/16", 1 1/8" x 1/16", 1 1/4" x 1/16", and so on. In bigger rings I can do up to about 2 1.2" diameter.     I can also pin mill small rings for outboard or two cycle pinned applications.

CUSTOM MADE RINGS

I can re machine many stock rings to make them work to your needs but some sizes must be made by Niagara.  Please measure before you order!    Custom rings are currently being made by Niagara.  Please phone me to see if your size is available in stock rings before ordering custom rings.
Custom rings are available up to 86" diameter. Call or write for prices.

 

https://www.ringspacers.com/rangcast.htm

 

OTTO GAS ENGINE WORKS

2167 Blue Ball Rd Elkton Maryland 21921-3330

phone: 410-398-7340

Edited June 29, 2023 by Terry Harper (see edit history)

[JV Puleo]

12 hours ago, Luv2Wrench said:

I get what you're saying and he is in the camp of it will be used for parades.  The reality for the area I live is that is all it could be used for.  In the restoration I do have to keep in mind the next owner.

With that said, the wear on the cylinders was 6 thou, which would fall in the hone it and ring it category but that's where the problem is.  I can't get rings. 

 

I've done some more research and here is the problem with Model T pistons on Metz connection rods.  The Metz connecting rod floats on the wrist pin.  The wrist pin floats in the piston.  It doesn't hit the cylinder walls because (and you'll love this) they added a fourth and very tall piston ring that conveniently covers the wrist pin ends. 

 

Your typical Model T piston doesn't have a way to secure the wrist pin because the connecting rod is secured to it and holds it in place.  With a Model T piston and a Metz connecting rod the wrist pin is free to move around and leave a lasting impression on the cylinder walls.  From what I've read there is, however, a rather simple solution.  Teflon plugs on each side of the wrist pin.  A slightly more complex solution is to machine a groove for a snap ring into the pistons.  This is what another Metz owner did.  Right now (and we know how fast these plans change...) I'm thinking of getting the Model T pistons and using the Metz connecting rods.  I just need to find the teflon "buttons" which I don't think will be too hard.

 

Joe: The issue with the crankshaft is what you said earlier, the flexibility.  It is damn near a 90 degree angle from the journal and the connecting rod is nearly brushing it as is.

 

I think I'd look into the Ross pistons first. Since you have to buy pistons in any case the difference in price may not be significant and it would solve all the fitment problems. The Mitchell also used that "extra ring to hold the pin" system. I think it was fairly common. Remember, this was before the invention of the oil-control ring so they saw the extra ring as an "upgrade".

 

The floating pins are an advantage in that you don't have to deal with pin locks that can fall out...think Buicks of the period.

The teflon plugs are readily available. My only question about them is "how long do they last". I say that because they are commonly used in racing engines which have a very short running life. I've never seen any reference to their long-term viability. You can also turn them out of aluminum. That was suggested by British authors Morgan & Wheatly. Their book, "The Restoration of Antique & Classic Cars", is long out of print and probably at odds with a lot of the "show-car thinking" today but contains many valuable tips regarding mechanical restoration. Needless to say, they were interested in driving old cars...a trailer is never mentioned.

 

And...I find it impossible to do any job to a lesser standard on purpose...not just with cars. That doesn't mean everything I do is the best, it isn't, but its the best I can do.  Besides, you have time on your side. I wouldn't see the Metz as the end but rather the beginning. As practice for eventually doing a bigger and more powerful car. Maybe even one of those that is all paint and bling with worn out or butchered mechanics.

Edited June 29, 2023 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[chistech]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjio5KKu-j_AhVKmokEHf20BL8QFnoECA4QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rosspistons.com%2F&usg=AOvVaw0UKA7C4A-hSqUyyLBzbx7D&opi=89978449

 

Mike is the guy I spoke with. What I liked was he suggested changes to the original design of my pistons that improved them. A major thing was to shorten the full bore width wrist pins. He suggested making them shorter as there was still plenty in the bosses and it would reduce the upper end weight of the assembly making the motor “snappier” to accelerate. I have gotten dozens of comments at the shows about how nice my olds motor runs. I know reducing some of that massive cast iron and steel mass had to help. The machine shop that rebuilt my engine was also very impressed with the job they did. He’s used to their actual racing built pistons but had never installed their custom “restoration “ pistons. He said there was no difference in the materials or quality of workmanship. Not sure how they would be different but the pistons do come with a print out of each piston with 5 measurements taken of each one and each one’s weight. The weight difference was virtually nothing. You will most likely have to send one of your pistons but they don’t charge extra for engineering from an original piston. I also got my pistons in a couple weeks from my initial phone call.